trax and sax. Re: Accessing a node name from within <xsl:attribute>

Subject: trax and sax. Re: Accessing a node name from within <xsl:attribute>
From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:26:01 -0700

> > > > Because I'm a developer who is using XT as embedded 
> > > > engine, and because TraX lacks SAX mode which XT has - 
> > > > to me there is simply no question what should be used 
> > > > as embeddable engine - only XT ;-)
> > I'm using TRAX in the sense of  http://trax.openxml.org .
> > 
> [Kay Michael]  Then I'm puzzled, 

> (a) because TRAX architecture is
> very much based on the concept of SAX filters

.. but trax.Processor is not "extends org.xml.sax.Parser" ( that's 
what XSLProcessorImpl is in XT )

Yes, there is  Transformer extends org.xml.sax.XMLFilter , but 
it is based on SAX2 ( which I don't think I'l ever use... I also hardly 
belive I'l ever use DOM ... )  

Also:

<quote>
This object represents a Transformer, which is a SAX2 XMLFilter. 
An object of this class can not be used concurrently over 
multiple threads. 
</quote>

... but I don't  see a sign of clone() there.

To me this all means that the API is a bit hypotetical ( and 
too complex for stupid human being ( me ) to understand  
and use ).

>  and (b) because as far as I
> know TRAX is currently a paper specification with no implementations, so you
> don't actually have the option of using it as an alternative to XT.

At the moment each XSLT engine has it's own API for embedding.

Current XT API allow me to knock  Ux  ( which is a container 
for chained SAX1 components ) easily not changing  a line of XT 
code.

I can do the same with other XSLT engines but it will be 
not that easy with their current APIs.

For some reasons  all  the vendors of  'other'  XSLT
engines ( except  XT ) announced that in the future they'll 
provide unified API for embedding their XSLT engines 
( called TRAX  ).

That "future API"  still lacks some features which are already 
implemented in XT ( providing me with tons of APIs 
which I don't need at all and don't understand if I need 
them in the future ).

That's why to me  there is simply no question what should 
be used as embeddable engine - only XT, which already 
has convenient and simple API (missing  not only in current, 
but even in the future  versions  of other engines).

Rgds.Paul.



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread